Checking OLD, Cambridge and Merriam-Webster for meaning, we glean the following:
Naturally accompanying or associated. OLD
Something that happens with something else and is connected with it. Cambridge
Accompanying especially in a subordinate or incidental way.
Note nowhere in any of the above defintions is the word intended used (or any similar connotation).
Concomitant was Merriam Webster's word of the day on 03/07/2007, this special privilege afforded the word its own short podcast, which can be found a short way down M-W reference. The podcast relates the Latin roots of the word:
...a descendant of Latin concomitari ("to accompany") and
ultimately of "comes," the Latin word for companion...
The podcast continues to describe two related words:
The two associated words, the verb concomitate, meaning "to
accompany," and another adjective, concomitaneous, meaning "of a
concomitant nature," didn't survive to accompany "concomitant" into
the 18th century.
It is noticeable then that the Latin roots of the word are also absent of any intentional quality.
Steven J. Jensen, in Good and Evil Actions: A Journey Through Saint Thomas Aquinas makes use of the compound adjective concomitant-intentional when describing three scopes of object regarding intention:
We will call these views, respectively, concomitant-intention,
end-intention, and means-intention.
This would make no sense at all if there was some inherent quality of intention in the word concomitant.
Having considered the above we can state with confidence then that there is no intentional quality to the word concomitant.
Concomitant refers to the quality of 'accompanying' (OLD, Merriam-Webster) or 'connect[ing]' (Cambridge). It has nothing at all to do with intention.